With No Signed Contract or Training Plan, Galvin Is Unconcerned Because The Voting Machines Are 'Relatively Easy To Use'

Just over a month before the state’s primary elections, Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin (pictured at left) still has not decided what equipment disabled voters in his state will be using. According to a report in The Boston Globe, Galvin is "near the end of a lengthy vetting process and could order the machines within days, depending upon an outside expert's evaluation of three models." The Help America Vote Act, signed in October 2002, mandated that states provide voting systems that allow disabled voteresz to vote privately and independently by January 1, 2006.

Three voting machines were given test-runs in last November’s elections: Hart Intercivic’s eSlate was tested in Woburn, the AutoMARK, marketed by ES&S was tested in Waltham, and the Diebold TSx was tested in Watertown. Presumeably these are the three systems that were reviewed by Michael Shamos of Carnegie Mellon University, who was hired by the state to test the equipment for security flaws and other potential problems. Shamos has finished his review, and he is expected to report back to the secretary of state's office soon.

While Galvin was doubtful that the accessible machines would be available for the September primary, he was optimistic that the machines would “almost certainly” be available in time for the Nov. 7 general election. Joseph M. Collins, chief executive of the Massachusetts Association for the Blind expressed disappointment that the equipment will not be available in September noting “It is unfortunate because the primary is when you have the most choices."

One of those choices will be for the Democratic candidate for Secretary of State, and Galvin’s opponent, John Bonifaz, observed “we're weeks away from the first statewide federal election under HAVA requirements, and we have no plan in place. There is no excuse for why it's taken so long. This law has been on the books for some time."

In the article, Bonifaz correctly observed that most states already had the machines in place, an assertion Galvin disputed. With Connecticut and Maine recently announcing their decision to use the IVS Inspire Vote-By-Phone system for disabled access, Massachusetts and New York remain as the only states that have not determined how they will meet HAVA accessibility requirements.

The article seemed to suggest that Galvin did not know how many polling places there were in his state and had sent a letter. Apparently a letter was sent to town clerks this month asking them how many polling places their communities have, but Galvin has not yet determined exactly how many the state would need.

Although some clerks have expressed concern about whether they will have time to receive training on the machines if they arrive last minute, Galvin also seems to be unconcerned about contracting, receiving, and deploying as many as 2100 voting machines in less than three months. Galvin said that should not pose a problem because the machines are "relatively easy to use".